Comments about ‘Big boys suddenly chicken to play Y., U.’

BYU should have a scheduling advantage over Utah. Our fan base is national. There will be blue-clad cougar boosters in the stands no matter where we play.

You said it already when you said this.

"There's a theme here: Big schools aren't obligated or inclined to play nonconference teams that actually might beat them. They can get to BCS bowls on the strength of their league play."

So what more is there? I'll tell you what the BYU, BSU, and Utah's of the college world needs to do......man up and play them at their HOME. Seriously though, I agree with the Big schools in a way. Why play these teams in SLC, Prova and Boise when not only do you have a chance of losing the game...but you also lose money...well, at least playing BSU does. I see Utah and BYU having the revenue in one game to pay the big boys...I don't think BSU does.

So for BSU especially, schedule those teams...and don't say they won't play you because they will if you just play them at their HOME. Heck, of all these...BSU is the most pathetic with their schedule. At least the MWC gives you a tougher league with 3 ranked teams.....Utah has been the best thus far, IMHO.

Utah has a huge advantage over BYU in getting games with the big boys. You see, the big boys are still scared of BYU, but not of Utah. Kyle and his clan could get a 1 for 2 with any BCS school. While BYU demands a home and home, so the big boys say no thanks Tom. We will go with the 2-1 and a W and schedule Utah.

Anonymous, I think you misunderstand the scheduling problem. Florida had its second-largest season opening crowd when they played Charleston Southern last month. The reason they don't schedule Utah or BYU is not because they're worried people won't come to the games. They do it because they don't want to lose to them. Opposing team fan bases are never the issue. They have enough fans that they can easily sell the extra tickets the visiting teams don't use.

As long as BCS schools can get huge paychecks from the BCS every year, they'll have no incentive to schedule tough non-BCS teams.

It's a triple-wammy Catch-22 situation for the best non-BCS teams.

First, they can't schedule BCS teams, especially home-and-home series with the best BCS teams.

Second, their records are downgraded because they "don't played anyone."

Third, the BCS conferences use "not-playing-anybody" as justification for not giving non-BCS teams equal access to the BCS bowls, to the lucrative BCS money train, and to having a real chance to compete for a national championship.

Then, the BCS conference teams use all of these negatives in their recruiting pitches to lure players away from the non-BCS schools.

The rich get richer and ensure that the poor never have a real opportunity to rise above the glass ceiling that the BCS conferences have established for the non-BCS conferences.

I have been saying this for years....BCS qualifiers will not play Non-BCS qualifiers because they have nothing to gain and everything to lose. My plan would be to schedule each conference against each other whether it be WAC vs Pac 10....MWC vs SEC..... then rotate it annually. It is only fair that ALL Div 1 teams should play each other one year or another.....Stop the BCS schools from dodging the non-BCS schools.

And BYU has a horrible record against top 25 teams in recent years. Scheduling BYU is less likely to be a guaranteed loss or a more difficult game for that BCS team!

Other than USC, the "giants" don't want to play teams like BYU, Utah, and Boise St. because they really do have A LOT tougher conference schedules. Playing in the MWC, BYU and Utah get division II level opponents throughout the season. USC is unique because they have an attitude that they can beat anyone, any time, any place. They always beat up on big-name non-conference opponents, despite losing to teams like Washington during conference play. BYU needs to take on this same attitude. Bronco Mendenhall said he wouldn't schedule one home game to two away games with BCS teams anymore. This is stupid because he is making the assumption that the MWC deserves the same respect as other big conferences. Sure, BYU and Utah might pull off an upset once a year, but their schedules are incredibly weak. Take the 2-for-1s and stop complaining about lack of respect! Losing a close game on the road to a formidable opponent is a lot better than beating up on the Eastern Washintons and Troy States at home. Face it--BYU and Utah aren't deserving of home and home games with BCS conference teams!

knows all about being chicken.

While it is true to a degree that BCS schools are taking a risk scheduling non-conference games with BU, Utah, or Boise, there is one advantage for those who do: Under the current BCS system, when several teams finish with only one loss or if several finish undefeated, the poll voters and computer rankings usually look closely at strength of schedule to determine which teams with identical records deserve a spot in the NC game. A team which has played and defeated a ranked BYU, Utah, or Boise team will have a better strength of schedule than a team that plays Charleston Southern or Wofford. If you schedule a ranked team like BYU, and win, it enhances your rankings in comparison with other teams with weaker schedules, AND if you lose to a ranked team like BYU or Utah, you won't fall as far as you would if you were upset by an Appalachian State. There are risks, but there are also rewards.

You are right, BYU does have an advantage in scheduling but Holmoe is too incompetant to get the job done. Byu could schedule anyone they want with the national fanbase due to the religion factor, but choose not to. News to Holmoe- byu is not the national power that strikes fear in all that you think they are. They are a solid program, nothing more.

It doesn't matter what (BYUs) fan base is, as the article points out, the BCS'ers WON'T sign up to play BYU for the reasons stated. It's the same for Utah basically. All I can say is good luck to the MWC (BYU particularly) in the future, and hope you can schedule BCS caliber schools.

Whatever dude. Just because there are LDS in other states doesn't mean they are by-who fans. Utah is by far the better team, especially for big games.

who has the bigger fan base. Teams will not schedule BYU, Utah, Boise State, TCU or Fresno State because there is a chance of being beaten. They do not want to look pathetic. While good teams get better the best teams want to stay on top and not get beat up.

I agree with statements above, I do not like how Bronco said we will not go 2 for 1, 2 at their place and 1 at ours... Its like breaking our contract with ESPN because we dont want to play during the week, its stupid and a waste of time like the MTN. We need to take every 2 for 1 we can get, if we end up filling our schedule with cupcakes and even teams that bronco wants to play like Northwestern and Army we are done and will never get respect, I think that Bronco might be confused as he said we dont need to play big schools as we dont need amny more credability??? Apparently he doesnt have a TV or read any newspapers, are people talking about the OU win? or the FSU lost? We better figure this mess out, we already are in a hole with the worst network in the nation - the MTN, lets not become a complete joke.

Very difficult to prove collusion by the BCS defenders, I suspect. But collusion can certainly create and maintain an impregnable wall between the accepted upper tier, and those that deserve to be included, which affects recruiting, tv revenue, and ultimately shuts down or creates another, lower tier.

It all comes down to greed.

It believe that the idea of a national championship arrived at by playoffs, more games, intensified media focus and the like, feeds the same monster, though not one the BCS has their funnels connected to as yet, and until they do, are not going to accomodate playoffs.

I don't support the idea of exploiting student athletes to feed the greed machines by either mechanism, believing both to be detrimental to the game itself, and to those who are not part of the clique.

I like the old conference-centric focus with a limited and prestigious bowl season as a reward offering good cross-conference matchups. The fan and media would have plenty of fodder for fueling fun football arguments, discussions, articles, and columns through the post-season, maintaining college football zest and traditions.

Seems too those exciting x-conference matchups would return to liven up schedules.

Utah hasn't taken a 2-for-1 against anyone in years. It has taken 1-and-dones against Michigan (twice) and Notre Dame (in 2010) in the last 10 years. That's it.

Finally, I'm not so sure Utah applies to this scenario. Yes, scheduling is a challenge, but Utah recently inked Pittsburgh to a home-and-home. It has games against Iowa State, Washington State, Oregon and Colorado on the schedule in the next four years.

I'll agree that such a slate isn't exactly Murderer's Row, but I know BYU would take it in a second to replace what it currently has. Hopefully, BYU gets better non-conference opponents in the future.

The whole BCS thing is going to get worse before it gets better. The Universitys with the realy good football programs know the formula to keep themselves in the national spotlight. Oklahoma paid dearly by scheduling BYU. Say what you will but OU has the Atheletes to beat anybody and without that season opening loss to BYU they could be undefeated and wranked #1 in the country. This is all about money. Sports are unpredictable. The best team/player dosn't always win. If you can scue the outcome by sand bagging and get away with it, the big boys figure "why not". The question is not wether the BCS automatic qualifiers have better teams, consistantly they do. If you are a BSU, BYU, Utah fan and don't realize this you are just being foolish. That is not the point. Everyone must have equal opertunity. That is the point. You can't just say you are better and have it be so. You must prove you are better each and every week out on the field. If you are indeed better it will show, and then you can say you earned what you got.

Has the same problem. Everyone criticizes BYU's schedule, but they can't get any of the big name schools to play in Provo.

See, here's where a playoff would be helpful...if you took every conference champion into a playoff, then out of conference scheduling would allow for a team to lose to a BYU or a Utah or BSU, because if they still win their conference, they're in the playoff...even if they lost 3 non-conference games. It eliminates the whole "the SEC doesn't have to schedule tough teams because their conference is so tough" malarky that we keep getting fed. Instead, it encourages them to schedule tougher mid-major teams like Tulsa, BYU, Utah, BSU, East Carolina, etc. to give them real tests to tune up for conference play.

The BCS has ruined college football.